Thursday, June 28, 2012

Love him, hate him, get his email missives, or wish him mute… I am with Michael on this.

Friends: We are on our
way to Single Payer Healthcare.

Why?

Because France
is better.

Yours, aging and sickening but worrying less about it,

Don

(I’m not really getting sick.)

From Michael Moore:

More Than a Victory, the Decision Today Was a Mandate for Us
to Act ...an end zone dance from Michael Moore

Thursday, June 28th, 2012

Dear Friends,

Even though it's been a few hours now, I'm
guessing you're still pinching yourself to make sure you're not dreaming. But
yes, it happened. At 10:07 this morning, the conservative Chief Justice of the
U.S. Supreme Court, John Roberts, not only joined with the liberal justices to
completely uphold almost every single part of the Obama health care law, he
wrote the majority opinion himself! In fact, he went even further. When he
realized that the government had poorly made its constitutional case to the
court, he went searching for a clause in their argument and the constitution
that would give him the justification he needed to back the administration and
to insure that his decision would hold up legally. In other words, even though
he is on the opposite side of the political fence, he wrote the Dems' paper for
them. Stunning.

The other four justices? They didn't just vote
to overturn the individual mandate part of the law, they all voted to kill theentireAct.

The media is already spending much time talking
about the mandate being the "centerpiece of the law," but the real
news is that if you ever have a pre-existing condition, you cannot now be
denied insurance. If you are a young adult without health insurance, you can
now stay on your parents' plan until age 26. The insurance company can no
longer say there is a lifetime cap to your coverage. The insurance companies
are now required to spend 85 cents out of every dollar they take in on actual
reimbursement for your health care – not on profit or "administrative
costs" (some companies have been taking over a 30% cut; Medicare's total
percentage oftheirbudget
for administrative costs: 2%).

I know that our side is not used to victories
and so we're not quite sure how to respond when we get one out of the blue. For
some of us, the first inclination is to point out just how weak the Obama law
actually is, that it doesn't provide true universal health care (26 million
will STILL be uninsured), and that it leaves control of the system in the hands
of the vultures, otherwise known as the health insurance companies. The
individual mandate was a huge gift to the private insurance companies,
guaranteeing them billions more from millions of new customers. And many of the
key provisions of this law don't even take effect until 2014 – and if the
Republicans win in November, you can kiss all of that goodbye.

So, yes, the bill is highly flawed and somewhat
wrong-headed – but what it IS is a huge step in the right direction. And
today's court decision cements that. The right wing knows this and they are
probably unraveling in some not-so-pretty ways right now. And that's why today
is a great day. The Right has been smacked down byone
of their own!They
know what we all know — that the path of history has been, and will continue to
move toward the basic human right that all people are entitled to see a doctor
and NOT have to worry about losing their home because they can't afford to pay
the medical bills. Those days are over, or will be soon, and that is where
civilization is headed. It's not headed back to the days of Oliver Twist.
Today's victory ismomentum, it's forward motion, and we
WILL have true universal health care in this country in the not too distant
future.

So take some time tonight to celebrate; this is
a victory for the people. Actually, more than a victory, it is amandatethat all of us must now make sure that
a second-term Obama continues to move the ball down the field, toward a system
like they have in every other First World
country on the planet. He simply has to improve Medicare and then expand it to every
citizen in the country. The countries that do this, their people live an
average of two to four years longer than we do. Is there a reason anyone
doesn't want an extra four years of their lives? Or that our babies would have
a better chance of surviving their first year like they do in the 48 countries
that have a better infant mortality rate than we do? Exactlywhois opposed to this? You'd have to be a
bit…crazy.

And that, I've come to believe, is the true
divide in this country. It's not blue state vs red state, liberal vs
conservative, Democrat vs Republican. The split we have in America can be
boiled down in its simplest form to this:On one side are the people who believe Adam and Eve
rode on dinosaurs 6,000 years ago – and then there's everyone else.On that first side are the people
who've been fed a diet of fear and lies and hate. And who is feeding them? The
1%. The richest people in the country, the ones who aren't done with us yet
because they still don't have enough wealth, have done their best to dumb down
the population through destroying our educational system and using media to
provide them with a vastly distorted sense of reality. The rich's only obstacle
is that they only hold 1% of the votes in the country. So they have to try to get
a slim majority of Americans to vote their way. And fear, plus keeping them
stupid, usually works.

So that's the battle ahead of us: Organizing and
mobilizing the majority of Americans to push for true universal health care,
Medicare for All. At one time, back in Illinois,
that was the position held by Barack Obama. He will not make this happen on his
own. He will only be able to do it when the mass of American people rise up and
demand it.Demand it.Why not start tonight?

Five years ago this week, my health care
documentary,Sicko, opened in theaters across the
country. I have spent the better part of the decade on this issue, and for me,
personally, fully aware of the current law's limitations, I am very happy with
today's news – not because of its specifics or nuances, but because it is a
road sign, and that sign points in the correct, humane and sane direction. THAT
makes this a great day.

I believe living in a house in a quiet place gives you more
time to simply be, which could even lead to reflection. Whereas city people
often make fun of suburbanites, I do think standing in front of your little
ranch house, staring at a tree, is not a bad way to spend time.

Good thoughts arise when you are in nature, even nature that
has lots of little (and sometimes big) houses in it.

People in cities process a lot of information…but this is
not necessarily a state of greater intelligence, but perhaps more an act of
greater filtering. You have to work hard to ignore the distractions.

Plus, a void is a great thing to fill. So living in a void
can often be a thrill.

Years ago, when I moved to LA, a friend from NYC had gotten
there ten months before I had and she said, “You can be a star in LA. In NY, NY
is the star.”

She meant that there is space to be who you are there. Which is quite something…Or maybe she meant
something else. We were very young.

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Gay Men and Women are filthy pigs. As are their allies.
Sixth Avenue, West Fourth Street Station, garbage everywhere. For many blocks in every direction. Are you
proud?

Summer is over on July 5. One thinks of Christmas that is
coming.

I declare all clichés null and void.

I don’t want to live in Brooklyn.

I find small children and dogs to be very sweet. Pretty much
all of them. Except for the ones who scream, nonstop, while riding a scooter,
for blocks, keeping pace with me, for over twenty minutes. Even if he clearly
has a developmental disability, as do so many of them these days, because of
the ubiquity of plastic, perhaps.

I was practically a vegan this week. This included eating a
lot of peanuts. I did not lose one pound.

I farm on my windowsill. Currently edible: Lavender and
parsley. Just parsley, really, in any
meaningful way.

My to-do list can inspire sadness. And I make this list. Do
I wish myself to be sad?

I want to know what 3013 will be like.

I will work while failure seeks rest. And if I fail, I will
have worked.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Living in New York
City is an eight month wonder of change and interest.

Four months, however, are spent mostly indoors, waiting for
it to be over.

I grew up here. But after living for so many years in Southern California, I find it hard to believe that this
sort of thing continues to happen, year after year---that no matter what, you
can count on severity over and over again.
BeaverSwamp, Arctic Blast.

It makes people pretty tough. But it also makes them seasonal. The city empties out most of the summer.

During the winter months, people just hunker down and get
depressed in the dark.

Being arboreal and equatorial, one longs for leafy breezes
in the high-up shade. Warm. Naked. Noisy.

Instead, we roast on hot concrete or trudge through
sludge. Good thing we’re adaptable.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

When the plant they genetically engineer (in water, on land,
or otherwise) that is used for photosynthesis to create the hydrogen gas to
fuel our vehicles goes global, there will be such a shift in the world economy,
such a collapse of the oil oligarchy (North American corporations, Russian,
Arab and otherwise), that one would think a great peace could arise.

Perhaps.

It is amazing that we are still, as a species, controlled by
the thugs who control the greatest commodities. It’s all, “Who owns the corn in
the silo?”---and it doesn’t change.

The current grand expression is the most expensive apartment
on earth, at the top of the tower they are building in midtown Manhattan
that you can see from Ohio,
is going to an oil daughter. Well, a
conglomerate daughter. This is both bullying and frivolous.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

I am not being glib. It is a crime. It needs to be dealt
with, of course. What it does to the victims is horrendous. It’s good that
stuff comes to light and it is taken care of.

All true.

But what a waste of time to point at an obvious disaster and
say, “You’re so wrong! You’re so wrong! How could you have done that?”

This might make the self righteous feel better, but my
question is always, “What on earth does self righteousness actually DO?”

Listen up ladies and parents of twelve year olds:

Men are insane. They are led by their sexual desires. If
they were not, there would be no prom dates and no babies. Now, for some awful
reason, men tend to LOCK IN on an object of desire at a certain time in their
life. Sometimes it’s girls. Sometimes
it’s boys. Sometimes it’s rubber spatulas. Sometimes it’s shoes. Sometimes, as they grow up, they get stuck on
something from an earlier time. I have no idea why. I am simply grateful that I
am garden variety grown up gay.

But this is the situation. Why aren’t we figuring out why
men get hooked in like this? And why are we not taking down the stories of
pedophiles, no matter how repellant, and then use them to figure out how to
stop future men from becoming pedophiles, if this is possible?

And ethically, if you can somehow figure out how to figure
out how a man goes down this path, maybe you can stop it?

I don’t know.

And then, if you could… would you then try to control other
forms of sexuality?

It’s so tricky.

But let’s get back to the real problem here. This must be stopped and men are wired the
way they are wired and somehow this all gets horribly screwed up and someone
has to get on top of this problem. Yelling that it’s wrong is like saying fire
is hot.

What about figuring out how this happens?
And then trying to ameliorate?

Or is it just too much fucking fun to have your crimes and
your self righteous horror reactions to it?

People. Come on. You’re smarter than this.

Assuming that people are all normal and everything is going
to be okay is naïve. This world is not
safe for your children. Scream all you want, I guess. But get scientific and
solve your troubles. Please.

Call me a totalitarian (but the Socialist kind), but there
is a way to manage society. Pay attention. Take notes. Find trends. Change the
path.

Monday, June 11, 2012

EDITORIAL

The Defense of Marriage
Act, Exposed

Published:
June 10, 2012

A
federal district judge in New Yorkruledlast week that the Defense of Marriage Act
violates the Constitution by requiring the plaintiff to pay federal estate tax
on her same-sex spouse’s estate, even though opposite-sex spouses are exempt.
It follows a string of other rulings striking down the law in a federal appeals
court, two federal district courts and a bankruptcy court.

With the Obama administration’s decisionin
2011 not to defend the law, that task has been taken up with relish by the
Republicans in Congress. Last week in California, their lawyersfiled a briefin the United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit challenging a district court rulingthat
the law violates the Constitution by denying health benefits to the same-sex
spouse of a federal lawyer.

The brief makes the claim that the law’s goals
are to maintain consistency in allocating federal benefits and encourage
relationships “that most frequently result in the begetting and raising of
children.” But in fact, the law thwarts consistency by accepting some state
definitions of marriage and rejecting others. And the Republicans offer no real
evidence that expanding the definition of marriage to include same-sex spouses
affects the ability of opposite-sex couples to marry or have children.

The federal courts that have reviewed this law
since 2010 have found that it fails to meet the most elementary test of
constitutionality. Under this “rational basis” test, a statute will be upheld —
even when groups are treated differently — if the law has some reasonable
relationship to a legitimate government purpose.

The Republican brief says the statute “merely
reaffirmed what Congress has always meant” when it refers to marriage: “a
traditional male-female couple.” The federal trial court in California explained, however, that
“tradition, standing alone, does not provide a rational basis for the law.”

The court also cogently argued that the act
should be subject to a higher standard of scrutiny because it discriminates on
the basis of sexual orientation. But even under the most forgiving standard,
the Defense of Marriage Act clearly violates equal protection.

Thursday, June 07, 2012

Today, while sitting across from a financial planner who was
trying to sell us some sort of instrument, projecting 18 years into our future,
I got this funny feeling that went something like this: “I hate you.”

Something about turning the rest of my life into an action
that is going to fill the columns of an excel sheet is not exactly what I had
in mind.

Why can’t old people just live in one little room with young
people under the same roof? Wouldn’t that be the easiest way to go? Then
everyone wouldn’t have to have millions in order to be so independent in the
gray years.

If everyone needs fewer millions, we could shrink the
efforts of the working years, burn less fuel, and attend fewer wars in order to
grab every damn thing we can so that we can each live alone in our own castles
as we hurtle toward death.

I do not mind so much the idea of having less money when I
am older. I do not like the idea of being alone when I am ancient. So why not marry the two?